Pete Domenici

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. For the information of the Senate, I might indicate that the second of the Boxer amendments, which had been listed in the unanimous consent, is probably not going to require a rollcall vote but will be adopted by voice. Immediately after that, the underlying ethanol amendment will be voted on, and a rollcall vote is being required on that. The Senator from New Mexico, the manager of the bill, intends when appropriate, when matters have been agreed on between the leadership, that we can proceed to offer an Indian amendment, which I think then would be followed by a second-degree amendment by the Senator from New Mexico, the minority manager of the bill. We are also pursuing with a degree of vigor an effort to see if we cannot get Senator Gregg and Senator Kennedy to agree to work out the LIHEAP portion of this bill. There are two amendments there. If they are able to work that out, that will put us in a position where we will dispose of that entire matter sometime this afternoon, hopefully. It seems they are very close to working that out, if the Senator is.

Mr. DOMENICI. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. DOMENICI. I would like to comment on what the distinguished Senator, Mr. Wyden, just raised, and say to my good friend, the Congressional Budget Office is wrong almost every way it turns. First, it uses forecast figures on plant costs of $2,300 per kilowatt. The right number is $1,250 per kilowatt. How do I know? There are two being built in Taiwan right now that General Electric designed--brand spanking new. They came to our office. I don't know if they had time to come and see you, I say to the Senator, but they brought with them their experts and told us those plants will cost not $2,300 per kilowatt but, rather, $1,250 per kilowatt. That is about half, as this Senator sees it.

Mr. DOMENICI. So they are half wrong right up front in terms of their assessment. Furthermore, the bill itself says that if this section that is being debated is ever used, the Secretary will evaluate the creditworthiness of any new project under this program. So they are already wrong by half on the cost. Then I would ask, Does the Congressional Budget Office really believe the Secretary will approve a significant risk? If he approves a significant risk, he would be in violation--direct conflict--of the law that we are discussing that he would be acting on that the CBO assumes will cost this extraordinary amount and impose this extraordinary risk. I thank the Senator for his comments and his responses. I am quite sure the Congressional Budget Office, as this Senator knows--I have only worked with it for the sum total of 26 years on all kinds of issues--I believe there is no subject they are more wrong on than their estimates of the cost of matters nuclear. First of all, they assume that everything that has gone wrong in the past is going to go wrong again, while the world is out there proving that such is not the case, while we are saying only under very limited circumstances would you ever use these sections to begin with, which would eliminate part of their reasoning, which would just leave the scene and would not even be applicable as they attempt to make the risk estimate. I thank the Senator.

Mr. DOMENICI. Yes.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. DOMENICI. I ask the majority leader, would it be appropriate to dispose of the pending LIHEAP amendment to clear the record for the evening in spite of the unanimous consent request?

Mr. DOMENICI. We have a Senator who still wants to speak on the pending bill. I assume after the time just provided has expired, we will be back for the distinguished Senator from Colorado to speak to an amendment; is that correct?

Mr. DOMENICI. For the record, under the bill, I withdraw amendment No. 841.

Mr. DOMENICI. I send a new second-degree amendment to the desk on behalf of Senator Bingaman.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet in open Executive Session during the session on Thursday, June 5, 2003, TBA, to mark up a revenue title to S. 824, the Aviation Investment and Revitalization Vision Act.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, June 5, 2003 at 1:30 p.m. to hold a hearing on Life Inside North Korea.

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on June 5, 2003, at 10 a.m. to conduct an oversight hearing on ``Reauthorization of the Defense Production Act.''

Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Title XI, on Thursday, June 5, 2003, at 2:30 p.m., in Room SR- 253.

Mr. DOMENICI

Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, there has been ample argument in opposition to the Bingaman amendment. The Senator from New Mexico, the manager of the bill, would merely like to say, while I accept the argument of the distinguished junior Senator from New Mexico, it seems to this Senator from New Mexico that to adopt the amendment truly creates an unworkable situation with reference to the source, supply, and the management of petroleum needs in the United States. That is all I have to say. I believe there is ample flexibility in the underlying bill. I do not believe we ought to make it more difficult to turn the spigot on and off with reference to the impact of ethanol on the gasoline supply in the country. I believe it is almost unworkable, for any President to decide, for instance, what caused the increase and to turn that on and off with reference to the supply and refining capacity and the like. With that, I yield the floor. I am prepared to vote up or down on the Bingaman amendment to the ethanol amendment.

Mr. DOMENICI. I am going to suggest the absence a quorum for about 10 minutes. Senators are being put on notice during that period of time that we are going to vote shortly. That is why we are having a 10- minute quorum call at this time. I yield the floor.

Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, regular order.

Mr. DOMENICI. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, I say to fellow Senators, we are going to have a unanimous-consent request that will pertain to ethanol. There will be no further votes this evening. We will have a unanimous-consent request regarding three amendments on ethanol that will be entered into shortly. All three will be voted on tomorrow, and that will dispose of the ethanol second-degree amendments. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DOMENICI. Do we have the rest of the consent ready?

Mr. DOMENICI. Does the Senator think we should wait now and do it or let Senator Schumer begin? Just so everybody understands, we do intend to have a consent that disposes of all three amendments, with votes on all three, Schumer and two others. But that consent agreement will come along shortly.

Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the following be the only remaining second-degree amendments to No. 850 and that they be related to ethanol: No. 1, Schumer, which we are hearing now, 20 minutes equally divided; Senator Boxer, 1 hour equally divided on two amendments. I further ask unanimous consent that following debate on the Schumer amendment this evening, the amendment be temporarily set aside. I further ask consent that when the Senate resumes consideration of the Energy bill on Thursday, Senator Boxer be recognized--at that time, she be recognized in order to offer her first amendment. Finally, I ask unanimous consent that following debate on the above listed amendments, they be temporarily set aside and the votes occur in relation to the amendments in the order offered at a time determined by the majority leader after consultation with the Democratic leader.

Mr. DOMENICI. I do not want to object, but I want to ask a question because I am rereading what I just read. It does not seem to me that it says there is a second Boxer amendment.